Dismissed¶22

State v. Saudamni Behera

Service Law – Recruitment

Orissa HC30 Oct 2025FAO/433/2016

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

FAO No.433 of 2016; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; Justice Dixit Krishna Shripad; State of Odisha v. Saudamini Behera; State Education Tribunal; S.24-C Orissa Education Act 1969; Orissa Education Service (Higher Secondary Branch) Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service Rules 1991; amendment w.e.f. 11.06.1997; 55% vs 48% in P.G.; appointment letter 28.05.1997; duty joined 09.06.1997; eligibility determined by law in operation at start of selection process; service jurisprudence references (Rama Jois; Samaradity Pal); appeal dismissed 30.10.2025.

What did the court decide?

None; the appeal was dismissed, the Court declining interference with the State Education Tribunal's decision. ¶22

State Vs Saudamni Behera — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

FAO No.433 of 2016

¶3

State of Odisha & Another

¶4

&. Appellants Mr.S.B. Mohanty, AGA

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Saudamini Behera & Another

¶7

& Respondents Mr.A.K. Baral, Advocate for R.1

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD

ORDER

30.10.2025

Order No.

Matter lies in a narrow compass, perhaps narrower compass. The question is whether, Respondent No.1, who was appointed as a Lecturer vide appointment letter dated 28.05.1997, had the requisite qualification for the post in question.

¶14

2. Mr.Mohanty, learned AGA appearing for the Appellants-State submits that Orissa Education Service (Higher Secondary Branch) Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service Rules, 1991 were amended with effect from 11.06.1997 prescribing 55% in P.G. as the minimum requirement and therefore, the Respondent No.1 did not possess the requisite qualification. This aspect having not been properly appreciated by State

¶15

Page 1 of 1

¶16

Education Tribunal, there is error apparent on the face of the record warranting interference of this Court under section 24-C of the Orissa Education Act, 1969.

¶17

3. Mr.Baral, learned counsel for Respondent No.1 submits that the selection process having been accomplished, the appointment letter was issued on 28.05.1997 and accordingly, the Respondent No.1 reported for duty on 09.06.1997; during the period between 08.04.1991 and 10.06.1997, the required qualification was 48% in PG, which his client had possessed and whatever changes have been effected by way of amendment, post selection followed by appointment would not be applicable to the case at all.

¶18

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the appeal papers, this Court declines in the mater broadly agreeing with the submission made on behalf of the Respondent No.1.

¶19

5. Any standard book on Service Jurisprudence like Justice Rama Jois on Services Under the State and Samaradity Pal8s law relating to Public Service would show that the law applicable would be the one, that was in operation as on the day the selection process began, if not the last date prescribed by the recruitment advertisement for making application and staking claim

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

in recruitment process. The decisions in this regard galore in the law reports.

¶22

In the above circumstances, the appeal being unworthy of consideration is liable to be and accordingly dismissed.

¶23

Web copy of the order to be acted upon by all concerned.

¶24

( Dixit Krishna Shripad) Judge

¶25

Basu

¶26

Signature Not Verified

¶27

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASUDEV NAYAK Designation: ASST. REGISTRAR-CUM-SR. SECRETARY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK Date: 31-Oct-2025 16:18:16

¶28

Page 3 of 3

State v. Saudamni Behera

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State v. Saudamni Behera

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shantilata Patra Vs State of Odisha

Keshaba Naik Vs State of Odisha

Radha Sharma Vs State of Odisha

Braja Kishore Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Muralidhar Swain Vs the Vice Chancellor, Utkal University, Bbsr

Pradip Kumar Senapati Vs State of Odisha